get_document_info

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Return' without stating whether the operation is read-only, fails on missing documents, or how the optional path parameter affects behavior. This leaves important safety and error-handling details undisclosed.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single concise sentence with no filler words, front-loading the primary action. However, it is so brief that it omits essential parameter semantics, but conciseness itself is appropriate for a simple getter.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The presence of an output schema covers return values, but the input parameter is completely undocumented and no behavioral context (e.g., optionality, error conditions) is provided. Given the tool's simplicity, the description should at least explain the 'path' parameter to be complete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema has no description for the 'path' parameter (0% coverage), and the tool description does not mention the parameter at all. The agent is left with no explanation of what path refers to, whether it is optional relative to a current document, or how it affects the returned info.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool returns document metadata (identity, type, version, size, sha256, compatibility) with a specific verb and resource. It does not explicitly distinguish from siblings like get_object or get_board_model, but the returned fields make the purpose reasonably distinct.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of scenarios, prerequisites, or exclusions. The description only implies it is for retrieving document information without context on how it differs from other getter tools.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.